Posted by
"Mind and Morals" Michael Coyne on Sunday, June 07, 2009 8:12:00 PM
I got a look at a batch of the new pennies today. You know,
the ones with scenes from President Lincoln’s life on the backs instead of the
Lincoln Memorial. For starters, they feel different from old pennies. They seem
lighter (although it could just be my imagination), as well as have a brighter
hue than old pennies (which is likely simply because they’re new). I am fully aware that these pennies are chemically identical to their predecessors. No, this post is
not a tale about the things that cross my mind while standing at a cash
register.
Looking at these new pennies, I started thinking about the
debate surrounding the penny’s production. For example, it actually costs the
US taxpayer 1.23¢ for the Government to mint one penny. This is an enormous
waste of money, especially considering that most Americans consider the penny a
disposable article.
I also thought about the political landscape of the late
1960s and 1970s, when President Nixon received criticism for suggesting a
reduction in size of the penny as a cost-cutting measure, while still allowing
for the price-accuracy of 1¢ increments. “Lunacy!” cried the left. So much so
that the DNC partnered with novelty interests to create the “Nixon Penny”—a
tiny penny bearing the likeness of the 37th President, which came in
cardboard and plastic packaging bearing the words, “NEW: Nixon Penny and getting
smaller… smaller… smaller.” The novelty item is shown below (courtesy eBay).
Ironic how an idea dismissed as ludicrous less than 40 years
ago seems to make so much sense now. Is this not the mark of a visionary? It’s
thinking like this that saves America from economic situations like the one we
face now. Thinking like this, which is designed to save money and cut costs, is
often dismissed by critics as having little or no merit, only to discover that
the thinking may indeed have been correct 30, 40, or even 100 years later.
Presidents Coolidge and Hoover were criticized for the idea
of economic non-intervention. Even today, biased history teachers still
maintain that these ideas caused the Great Depression. Save for the fact that
Presidents Kennedy, Nixon, Ford, and Reagan all instituted policies designed to
extricate the Government from our day-to-day economic lives.
Senator Barry Goldwater was called “Far Right” for his brand
of limited-government conservatism. Of course, Ronald Reagan was elected to two
terms as president for roughly the same platform.
We are taught that the Marshall Plan for Communist
containment was a waste of resources and was somehow bad for America. Except
now, one of our greatest fears is the armament of North Korea and that
country’s likely desire to move into the South. Suddenly, Communist containment
doesn’t sound so awful.
My point is this: America needs to think very carefully
about the ideas that are being dismissed today regarding the crises facing our
country. “We can’t wait for some ‘invisible hand’ to fix the economy. That’s
insane!” people cry, “We need to get the Government involved!” “The Government
can’t be looking for cost-cutting options right now. That’s nuts. We need to
spend like sailors on leave to get the economy going again!”
True vision tends to be ignored when it counts, and
appreciated only after it has become too late. From Nixon’s idea about
shrinking the Penny to save money, to Hoover’s desire to let private enterprise
repair the broken economy, rather than letting the Government make it worse.
Funny how things turn out.